About 10 years ago I went on IDEO’s human-centred design course. It was free, it was easy to grasp, and it gave us the tools we needed to design great products. It’s still around, you can check it out here.
At the start of the course we learned about the design process: inspiration, ideation, implementation. We learned that first you speak to people. The methods included interviews, surveys, observation, and more. Then you brainstorm some ideas, test them and iterate until you got to a great solution. Finally you implement it, while continuously gathering feedback and tweaking the final solution until it’s “perfect”.
“Okay,” I thought, “maybe it’s pretty similar to the process I learned about in uni: Discover, Design, Test, Manufacture. Or maybe it’s similar to the process I learned in university: Research, Build, Iterate Aaaaand! It’s pretty similar to our beloved Double Diamond from the Design Council.
What’s going on?! It’s almost as if design process is universal whether you’re designing a video game character, a magazine cover, a chair, a toothbrush, or a website or service. The point I’m trying to make is that design is design.
Why then, is the industry so hell bent on dividing researchers from designers?
Look at any user researcher job on LinkedIn. Here’s one:
Bachelor’s degree in a relevant field (e.g., Human-Computer Interaction, Psychology, Data Science, Public Health). Advanced degrees are a strong plus.
And here’s a requirement for a designer:
Bachelor’s degree in Design, Human-Computer Interaction, Psychology, or a related field; Master’s degree preferred.
Does that mean that I designer won’t be picked for a research role? And vise versa? That’s just stupid.
Let me tell you a story. I went to a conference once and met some junior designers from a FAANG that I won’t name. User journey map? Haven’t heard of one. Do you run user interviews? No. What do you do then? We design the screens.
I could only chuckle nervously and excuse myself.
Here’s the problem with researchers who don’t design and designers who don’t research. Let’s say you’re a researcher who found some insights. You present them to the design team and they go away to do some designs but they don’t have the full context. It’s like having two halves of the brain that don’t speak to each other. I mean, we try, we communicate, but things ultimately fall through. We have these insight trackers and knowledge repositories, which are undoubtedly useful but don’t solve the core problem: having the full context.
My best time as a researcher was when I worked with a designer who used to run research sessions himself. He grasped exactly what was needed to be done, helped with the admin, and took some ace notes. Then, I took on some screens to design and helped him in return. We worked as one unit. It was great.
So the case I’m trying to make here is that designers should be researchers. You don’t need a PhD in Psychology to speak to some people and learn about their problems. Similarly, if you’re a researcher, I highly suggest you pick up some design skills. Ultimately, if you’re a hiring manager and you see a designer apply for a research position, think twice before rejecting them, and vice versa for researchers applying for design positions.
The portfolio should speak for itself.
